Induction of immune response in chickens primed in ovo with an inactivated H9N2 avian influenza virus vaccine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Infection of chickens with low pathogenic avian influenza virus, such as H9N2 virus, culminates in decreased egg production and increased mortality and morbidity if co-infection with other respiratory pathogens occurs. We have previously observed the induction of antibody- and cell-mediated immune responses after intramuscular administration of an H9N2 beta-propiolactone inactivated virus vaccine to chickens. Given the fact that in ovo vaccination represents a practical option for vaccination against H9N2 AIV in chickens, in the current study, we set out to characterize immune responses in chickens against a beta-propiolactone inactivated H9N2 virus vaccine after primary vaccination in ovo on embryonic day 18, and secondary intramuscular vaccination on day 14 post-hatch. We also included the Toll-like receptor 21 ligand, CpG ODN 2007, and an oil emulsion adjuvant, AddaVax™, as adjuvants for the vaccines. RESULTS: Antibody-mediated immune responses were observed after administering the secondary intramuscular vaccine. Cell-mediated immune responses were observed in chickens that received the beta-propiolactone inactivated H9N2 virus combined with AddaVax™. Our results demonstrate that adaptive immune responses can be induced in chickens after a primary in ovo vaccination and secondary intramuscular vaccination.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".